Subject:
|
Re: Should .dat content be allowed in cad.dev.org.ldraw?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 19 Aug 1999 20:21:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
249 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, "John VanZwieten" <john_vanzwieten@email.msn.com>
writes:
> If we are going to crosspost the parts voting thread to
> lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, then we should allow .dat content there. Often
> a post about a correction to a part will include a few lines of .dat
> content. A reply of mine was just rejected b/c it was being crossposted
> to both groups.
Hmm. Let's see -- well, according to the .cad.dev.org.ldraw group charter,
it's a "Focused discussion group for the planning and development of the
domain ldraw.org, its website, and related resources." DAT files are indeed
related resources, but as I understood Tim's original wish for the group,
it's for talking high-level stuff (organization and planning and structure
of www.ldraw.org content), not low-level stuff (individual parts, etc.).
For example, on 14 Apr 1999 Tim wrote:
"I would set the charter at discussion of aspects of the site such as
design and content, legal rights, contributions, format, and the
maintenance of it in the future. It can also be an area for people to
ask questions if they need help on the site (rather than emailing
webmaster@ldraw.org, or supplemental to such). But this group would
have to be kept to different things as they relate to the site. A good
idea would be to have discussion on software distribution from the site
in the site's format, one of the features I am strongly for but am not
sure where individual program authors stand on."
-- http://www.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=1286
And during the discussion of multilanguage support for www.ldraw.org back
when there only was .cad.dev:
"I think this pushes us further towards the need for a (temporary if
anything) newsgroup at lugnet.cad.ldraw-org to focus discussion better."
-- http://www.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=1161
It could be changed to allow DAT content if Tim felt it didn't muddy-up his
original vision for the newsgroup. So I guess the short form of my answer
is: Ask Tim.
> Maybe the voting announcement should just have all followups set to cad.dev.
Probably in any case, yeah, I would think.
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
